Mongols and Russia discussions about the consequences of Mongol rule. Discussions about the impact of the Mongol-Tatar invasion on the Russian state. Positive and negative influence of the Tatar-Mongol yoke

By the right of the conqueror, the great khan of the Golden Horde, Batu, achieved recognition of his supreme power (suzerainty) from the princes of the Russian lands. The Russian lands were not directly included in the territory of the Golden Horde: their dependence was expressed in the payment of tribute - the Horde "exit" - and in the issuance of "labels" by the khan of the Golden Horde - letters for reigning to the Russian rulers. In terms of the scale of destruction, the Mongol conquest differed from the countless internecine wars primarily in that they were carried out simultaneously in all lands.

The heavy result of the Mongol conquest for Russia was the payment of tribute to the Horde. Tribute ("withdrawal") began to be levied back in the 40s of the 13th century, and in 1257, by order of Khan Berke, the Mongols carried out a population census ("number") in North-Eastern Russia, establishing fixed rates of collection. Only the clergy were exempted from paying the exit (before the adoption of Islam in the Horde at the beginning of the 14th century, the Mongols were distinguished by their religious tolerance). To control the collection of tribute, representatives of the khan, the Baskaks, were sent to Russia. By the end of the XIII - the beginning of the XIV century. The Basque institute was abolished due to the active opposition of the Russian population. From that time on, the princes of the Russian lands themselves were engaged in the collection of the Horde "exit", which the khan held in obedience with the help of the system of issuing labels for the reign.

The question of the influence of the Mongol-Tatar invasion and the establishment of Horde rule on the history of Russia has long been a controversial one. There are three main points of view on this problem in Russian historiography. First, it is a recognition of the very significant and mostly positive impact of the conquerors on the development of Russia, which prompted the process of creating a unified Moscow state.

The founder of this point of view was N.M. Karamzin, and in the 1920s it was developed by the so-called Eurasians. At the same time, unlike L.N. Gumilyov, who painted in his research a picture of good-neighborly and allied relations between Russia and the Horde, did not deny such obvious facts as the ruinous campaigns of the Mongol-Tatars to the Russian lands, the collection of heavy tribute, etc.

Other historians (among them S.M.Soloviev, V.O.Klyuchevsky, S.F. They believed that the processes that took place in the second half of the XIII-XV centuries, either organically followed from the trend of the previous period, or arose independently of the Horde.

Finally, many historians are characterized by a sort of intermediate position. The influence of the conquerors is regarded as a noticeable, but not decisive, development of Russia (at the same time, it is unambiguously negative). The creation of a single state, according to B.D. Grekov, A.N. Nasonov, V.A. Kuchkin and others, happened not thanks to, but in spite of the Horde.

Based on the current level of knowledge about the economic, social, political, cultural development of the Russian lands of the 13th - 15th centuries, as well as the nature of Russian-Horde relations, we can talk about the consequences of a foreign invasion. The impact on the economy was expressed, firstly, in the direct devastation of territories during the Horde campaigns and raids, which were especially frequent in the second half of the 13th century. The hardest blow was dealt to the cities. Secondly, the conquest led to the systematic siphoning of significant material resources in the form of the Horde "exit" and other extortions, which drained the country.

The Horde sought to actively influence the political life of Rus. The efforts of the conquerors were aimed at preventing the consolidation of Russian lands by opposing some principalities to others and their mutual weakening. Sometimes the khans went for these purposes to change the territorial and political structure of Rus: on the initiative of the Horde, new principalities were formed (Nizhny Novgorod) or the territories of the old ones (Vladimirskoe) were divided.

The consequence of the invasion of the XIII century. was the strengthening of the isolation of the Russian lands, the weakening of the southern and western principalities. As a result, they were included in the structure that arose in the XIII century. an early feudal state - the Grand Duchy of Lithuania: the Polotsk and Turovo-Pinsk princedoms - by the beginning of the XIV century, Volyn - in the middle of the XIV century, Kiev and Chernigov - in the 60s of the XIV century, Smolensk - at the beginning of the XV century.

As a result, Russian statehood (under the suzerainty of the Horde) survived only in North-Eastern Russia (Vladimir-Suz-Dal land), in Novgorod, Murom and Ryazan lands. It is North-Eastern Russia from about the second half of the XIV century. became the nucleus of the formation of the Russian state. At the same time, the fate of the western and southern lands was finally determined.

Thus, in the XIV century. the old political structure ceased to exist, which was characterized by independent principalities-lands ruled by different branches of the princely family of Rurikovich, within which there were smaller vassal principalities. The disappearance of this political structure also marked the subsequent disintegration of the one that took shape in the 9th-10th centuries. Old Russian nationality - the ancestor of three currently existing East Slavic peoples. In the territories of North-Eastern and North-Western Russia, the Russian (Great Russian) nationality begins to gradually take shape, on the lands that became part of Lithuania and Poland, the Ukrainian and Belarusian nationalities.

In addition to these "visible" consequences of the conquest, significant structural changes can be traced in the socio-economic and political spheres of ancient Russian society.

In the pre-Mongol period, feudal relations in Russia developed in general according to the scheme characteristic of all European countries: from the predominance of state forms of feudalism at an early stage to the gradual strengthening of patrimonial forms, albeit slower than in Western Europe. After the invasion, this process slows down, there is a conservation of state forms of exploitation. This was largely due to the need to find funds to pay the "exit".

In Russia in the XIV century. state-feudal forms predominated, the relations of personal dependence of the peasants on the feudal lords were at the stage of formation, the cities remained in a subordinate position in relation to the princes and boyars. Thus, there were no sufficient socio-economic prerequisites for the formation of a single state in Russia. Therefore, the leading role in the formation of the Russian state was played by the political ("external") factor - the need to confront the Horde and the Grand Duchy of Lithuania. Because of this need, broad strata of the population - both the ruling class, the townspeople, and the peasantry - were interested in centralization.

Such a "outstripping" in relation to socio-economic development, the nature of the process of unification determined the characteristics of the formed by the end of the 15th - 16th centuries. states: strong monarchical power, strict dependence of the ruling class on it, a high degree of exploitation of direct producers. The latter circumstance was one of the reasons for the formation of the serfdom system.

Thus, the Mongol-Tatar conquest had a generally significant impact on the ancient Russian civilization.

In addition to the direct consequences of the Horde policy, structural deformations are observed here, which ultimately led to a change in the type of feudal development of the country. The Moscow monarchy was not directly created by the Mongol-Tatars, rather the opposite: it took shape in spite of the Horde and in the struggle against it. However, indirectly, it was the consequences of the influence of the conquerors that determined many of the essential features of this state and its social system.

North-Eastern Russia after the Mongol invasion

The relatively more favorable development of North-Eastern Russia (Vladimir-Suzdal land), which became the nucleus of the new united Russian state (Russia), in the second half of the XIII-XIV centuries. was associated with factors that operated on the eve of the invasion and after it.

The princes of the Vladimir-Suzdal land almost did not participate in the internecine struggle of the 30s of the 13th century, which significantly weakened the Chernigov and Smolensk princes. The Grand Dukes of Vladimir succeeded in extending their suzerainty to Novgorod, which turned out to be a more profitable "all-Russian" table than Kiev and Galich, bordering on the steppe, which had lost their significance.

In contrast to the Smolensk region, Volhynia and Chernigov region, North-Eastern Russia until the second half of the XIV century. practically did not experience an onslaught from the Grand Duchy of Lithuania. The influence of the Horde factor was also ambiguous. Although North-Eastern Russia was exposed in the XIII century. very significant devastation, it was her princes who were recognized in the Horde as the "oldest" in Russia. This contributed to the transition of the status of the "all-Russian" capital from Kiev to Vladimir.

During the Mongol invasion, Northern Russia simultaneously faced the expansion from the Baltic states. By the XII century. the population of the Baltic lands entered the phase of the formation of statehood. At the same time, the territories inhabited by the Baltic tribes turned out to be the object of the invasion of the German knights, who, with the blessing of the Pope, organized a crusade against the Livs.

In 1201, the crusaders, led by the monk Albert, founded the Riga fortress, and the next year the "Order of the Swordsmen" was formed on the conquered lands. In 1212. the crusaders subjugated all of Livonia and began to conquer the Estonian lands, coming close to the Novgorod borders.

The expansion of the crusaders was accompanied by the distribution of lands to German feudal lords and the forcible conversion of the local pagan population to Catholicism. This was the difference between the policy of the Order and the actions of the Russian princes in the Eastern Baltic states: the latter did not claim to directly seize the land (content with tribute) and did not carry out violent Christianization. In 1234 the Novgorod prince Yaroslav Vsevolodich, the son of Vsevolod the Big Nest, managed to defeat the German knights near Yuryev (Derpt). And two years later, the swordsmen were defeated by the militia of the Lithuanians and Semigallians.

The defeats suffered forced the remnants of the Order of the Swordsmen in 1237 to unite with the larger Teutonic Order, which by this time, as a result of active "missionary" activities, had occupied the lands of the Prussians.

The unification of the forces of the spiritual-knightly Orders and the formation of the Livonian Order significantly increased the danger that threatened Veliky Novgorod and its "suburb" of Pskov. At the same time, the danger from the Swedish and Danish knights increased.

Bibliography

For the preparation of this work were used materials from the site russia.rin.ru/

Other materials

Mongolian conquest of Russia: consequences and role in Russian history

It could not have had larger consequences, first of all, as has just been said, an increase in their role in the economy, but not only. The political significance of large grand ducal possessions could also have increased. In our opinion, if at least at the first stage after the conquest of Rus by the Mongols, one can say ...

Domestic historiography of the Mongol conquest of Russia

Europe to the Middle East has little to do with these events. But there is still no comprehensive generalizing work on the national historiography of the Mongol conquest of Rus. At the same time, the successive development of historical knowledge objectively leads to a rethinking and rechecking of one or another with the flow ...

This circumstance played a fatal role not only in the fate of the conquered peoples of Asia and Europe, but also in the fate of the Mongol people themselves. 1.2. Genghis Khan and his army. While the Tatars split into small hordes, they could only disturb their neighbors with such raids as raids ...

In 1783, this was the last fragment of the Golden Horde that came from the Middle Ages to the New Time. So, what are the consequences of the Tatar-Mongol yoke for Russia. This issue is also controversial among historians. Most of the sources, based on facts, talk about the negative consequences of the Tatar ...

Traditional and new assessments of the Tatar-Mongol yoke in Russia

He was soon killed by his rivals. Thus, the unification of the Russian lands into a single centralized state led to the liberation of Russia from the Tatar-Mongol yoke. The Russian state became independent. His international ties have expanded significantly. Ambassadors from many came to Moscow ...

Tatar-Mongol invasion and its consequences for the Russian lands

State structure, the main stages of its political history and campaigns of conquest. These points are important for a correct understanding of the nature of the Tatar-Mongol invasion of Russia and its consequences. The Golden Horde was one of the ancient states of the Middle Ages, whose vast possessions ...

The nature of the socio-economic development of Russia during the Mongol-Tatar invasion

At the same time, strengthening the princely feuds. Thus, the Mongol-Tatar invasion can in no way be called a progressive phenomenon in the history of our country. Chapter III. Discussions about the nature of the socio-economic development of Russia during the Mongol-Tatar yoke §1. L.N. Gumilyov's position ...

2. The period of Mongol rule 2.1 Tax system The nomads could only subjugate the Russian lands, and not include them in their empire. In the lands they conquered, the Mongols rushed to determine the population's ability to pay by conducting a census. The first census in Western Russia ...

Mongolian states on the territory of Russia in the 12-16th centuries (Report)

To change the territorial and political structure of Russia: on the initiative of the Horde, new principalities were formed (Nizhny Novgorod) or the territories of the old ones (Vladimirskoe) were divided. The struggle of Rus against the Mongol yoke, its results and consequences The struggle against the Horde yoke began from the moment of its establishment. She...

Managed to curb Genghis Khan, but also the wealth of Russia. The fragmented, fragmented country seems to be an even more tasty morsel. Mongol invasion as a stage in national history § 1. Invasion of the Tatar-Mongols in Russia “... I have no doubt that who will survive after us, after this era, and will see ...

Eastern Russia. Many cities were ravaged five or more times. These campaigns also caused enormous damage to Ancient Russia. 3. Defeat of the Mongol - Tatar yoke. The Horde armies began to appear in North-Eastern Russia one after the other: 1273 - the ruin of the cities of North-Eastern Russia by the "tsars ...

Assessing the consequences of the Tatar-Mongol yoke and its influence on the subsequent development of the Russian state, one should recognize its ambiguous nature. Therefore, it makes sense to consider each area of public life separately.

Economy.

Destruction of cities - 49 cities are destroyed. 15 of them became villages, 14 were never restored.

Slowdown in the development of crafts - many artisans, like city dwellers, died during the storming of the city or were taken prisoner to the Horde; some technologies were lost forever (cloisonné enamel, stone carving); artisans did not work for the market, but for the khans and the princely court.

The payment of the tribute fell a heavy burden on the state. There was a leakage of silver - the main monetary metal of Russia, which hindered the development of commodity-money relations.

Politics.

Appointment of princes with the help of special letters - labels (But! They only confirmed or rejected the candidacy of the prince, without affecting the selection procedure, while the right of inheritance was preserved).

Didn't create their own ruling dynasty.

They created the institution of governors - Baskaks - leaders of military detachments who followed the activities of the princes and collected tribute. The denunciation of the Baskak led either to the summons of the prince to the Horde, or to a punitive campaign. (But! In the end of the 13th century, the collection of tribute was transferred to the hands of the Russian princes)

The withering away of veche traditions and the formation of a political course towards the establishment of the unlimited power of the ruler according to the Eastern model.

The Mongols artificially supported territorial and political fragmentation, which became the basis for subsequent centralization from above.

Social structure.

· Almost complete destruction of the old Varangian nobility.

· Formation of a new nobility with a strong Tatar element - Sheremetevs, Derzhavins, Tolstoy, Akhmatovs.

Religion

The Horde did not destroy the Orthodox faith and imposed its own religion.

· The destruction and plundering of churches took place only for profit, and not for ideological reasons.

· The church was exempted from taxation, its holdings were declared inviolable.

· During the yoke, the number of monasteries increased, their land tenure expanded significantly.

· Strengthening the position of the church more as a political institution than as a spiritual one.

· Protection of the Orthodox Church from the influence of the West.

Public consciousness.

· Changing the consciousness of the rulers - the princes were forced to demonstrate servility. The disobedient were humiliatingly punished or destroyed.

· Approval of the eastern model of government - cruel and despotic, with unlimited power of the sovereign.

There are three main points of view on this problem in Russian historiography.

1.S.M.Soloviev, V.O. Klyuchevsky and most historians - the Yoke for Russia was a great disaster

Ygo is a system of relations between conquerors (Mongols) and vanquished (Russians), which manifested itself in:

The political dependence of the Russian princes on the khans of the Golden Horde, who issued labels (letters) for the right to rule in the Russian lands;

Dannic dependence of Russia on the Horde. Russia paid tribute to the Golden Horde (food, handicrafts, money, slaves);

Military dependence - the supply of Russian soldiers to the Mongol troops.

2. NM Karamzin noted that the Mongol-Tatar domination in Russia had one important positive consequence - it accelerated the unification of the Russian principalities and the revival of the united Russian state. This gave rise to some later historians to talk about the positive influence of the Mongols.

3. A. Fomenko, V. Nosovsky believe that there was no Mongol-Tatar yoke at all. The interaction of the Russian principalities with the Golden Horde was more reminiscent of allied relations: Russia paid tribute (and its size was not so great), and the Horde, in return, ensured the security of the borders of the weakened and scattered Russian principalities.

5. Contemporary Russian discussions about Prince Alexander Nevsky

Recently, the political talents of the prince have been more and more insistently emphasized, since, it turns out, "Alexander Nevsky performed his main feat not on the battlefield as a military leader, but in the political arena as a statesman." At the same time, "our great ancestor ... selflessly defended Russia from external enemies and understood the decisive role of the people in this defense."

Their opponents are not inclined to exaggerate Alexander's services to the Fatherland. They accuse the prince of collaboration, of what exactly from “surrendered” to the Mongol hordes Veliky Novgorod and Pskov, which did not reach the hordes of Batu in 1237-1238, it was he who, drowning in blood the first attempts to resist the Horde of the urban “lower classes”, ensured the power of the Horde khans for almost a quarter of a century and thereby consolidated the despotic system of government in Russia, imposing it on his homeland and thereby slowing down its development for several centuries ahead. “The shame of Russian historical consciousness, Russian historical memory is that Alexander Nevsky became an indisputable concept of national pride, became a fetish, became the banner not of a sect or a party, but of the very people whose historical fate he cruelly distorted. ... Alexander Nevsky, no doubt, was a national traitor. "

When speaking of Alexander Nevsky, a professional historian is obliged to distinguish between at least five characters in our history and culture. First of all, this is the Grand Duke Alexander Yaroslavich, who lived in the middle of the 13th century. Secondly, the holy noble prince Alexander Yaroslavich, the defender of Orthodoxy, canonized already forty years after the death of his prototype. Thirdly, somewhat modernized in the 18th century. the image of St. Alexander Nevsky - a fighter for access to the Baltic Sea (after all, he defeated the Swedes at almost the very place that Peter I chose to build the capital of the Russian Empire). And finally, fourthly, the image of the great defender of the entire Russian land from German aggression, Alexander Nevsky, created in the late 1930s thanks to the joint efforts of Sergei Eisenstein, Nikolai Cherkasov and Sergei Prokofiev. In recent years, the fifth Alexander has been added to them, for whom, apparently, the majority of TV viewers of the Rossiya TV channel voted: a just strong ruler, a defender of the “lower classes” from the boyars-“oligarchs”. the main qualities - justice, strength, the ability to resist moneybags, talent, political foresight - all this is not yet there, but the need of society for this is - and the most acute.

1. The battles for which Prince Alexander became famous were so insignificant that they are not even mentioned in Western chronicles.

This idea was born out of sheer ignorance. The battle on Lake Peipsi is reflected in German sources, in particular, in the "Elder Livonian Rhymed Chronicle". Based on it, some historians talk about the insignificant scale of the battle, because the Chronicle reports the death of only twenty knights. But here it is important to understand that we are talking about the "knight brothers" who performed the role of the highest commanders. Nothing is said about the death of their warriors and the representatives of the Baltic tribes recruited into the army, who formed the backbone of the army.
As for the Battle of the Neva, it did not find any reflection in the Swedish chronicles. But, according to Igor Shaskolsky, a prominent Russian specialist in the history of the Baltic region in the Middle Ages, “... this should not be surprising. In medieval Sweden until the beginning of the XIV century, no major narrative works on the history of the country such as Russian chronicles and large Western European chronicles were created. " In other words, the Swedes have no place to look for traces of the Battle of the Neva.

2. The West did not pose a threat to Russia at that time, unlike the Horde, which Prince Alexander used exclusively to strengthen his personal power.

Wrong again! It is unlikely that in the 13th century one can speak of a “united West”. Perhaps it would be more correct to talk about the world of Catholicism, but as a whole it was very motley, heterogeneous and fragmented. It was not the "West" that really threatened Russia, but the Teutonic and Livonian orders, as well as the Swedish conquerors. And for some reason they smashed them on Russian territory, and not at home in Germany or Sweden, and, therefore, the threat posed by them was quite real.
As for the Horde, there is a source (Ustyug Chronicle), which makes it possible to assume the organizing role of Prince Alexander Yaroslavich in the anti-Horde uprising.

3. Prince Alexander did not defend Russia and the Orthodox faith, he simply fought for power and used the Horde to physically eliminate his own brother.

This is just speculation. Prince Alexander Yaroslavich primarily defended what he inherited from his father and grandfather. In other words, with great skill he performed the task of a guardian, a keeper. As for the death of his brother, it is necessary, before such verdicts, to study the question of how he, in recklessness and youth, put Russian armies useless and in what way he generally acquired power. This will show: not so much Prince Alexander Yaroslavich was his destroyer, as he himself claimed the role of an early destroyer of Russia ...

4. Turning to the east, not to the west, Prince Alexander laid the foundations for the future revelry of despotism in the country. His contacts with the Mongols made Russia an Asian power.

This is already completely groundless journalism. All Russian princes were then in contact with the Horde. After 1240, they had a choice: to die on their own and subject Russia to another ruin, or to survive and prepare the country for new battles and, ultimately, for liberation. Someone rushed headlong into battle, but 90 percent of our princes of the second half of the XIII century chose a different path. And here Alexander Nevsky is no different from our other sovereigns of that period.
As for the "Asian power", different points of view are really being voiced here today. But as a historian, I believe that Russia has never become it. It was not and is not part of Europe or Asia or something like a mixture, where European and Asian take on different proportions depending on the circumstances. Russia is a cultural and political essence that is sharply different from both Europe and Asia. In the same way, Orthodoxy is neither Catholicism, nor Islam, nor Buddhism, nor any other confession.

It only remains to say that Alexander Nevsky is not a villain or a hero. He is the son of his difficult time, which was not at all guided by the "universal values" of the XX-XXI centuries. He did not make any fateful choice - he was chosen by the Horde khans, and he only fulfilled their will and used their strength to solve his momentary problems. He did not fight against the crusading aggression, but fought with the Dorpat Bishop for spheres of influence in the Eastern Baltic and negotiated with the Pope. Nor was he a traitor to national interests, if only because these very interests, like the nation, had not yet existed and could not have been. Collaboration is a concept that did not exist in the 13th century. All these assessments, all "choices", all concepts are from the 20th century. And in the XIII century they have no place - if, of course, we are talking about the actual scientific discussion.

Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below

Students, graduate students, young scientists who use the knowledge base in their studies and work will be very grateful to you.

Posted on http://www.allbest.ru/

1. Reasons for the success of the Mongols

The question of why the nomads, who were significantly inferior to the conquered peoples of Asia and Europe in economic and cultural terms, subordinated them to their power for almost three centuries, has always been in the center of attention, both domestic and foreign historians. The Mongols outnumbered their opponents in military power. As already noted, the Steppe in military terms always surpassed the Forest in ancient times. After this little introduction to the "problem", let us list the factors of victory of the steppe dwellers, cited in the historical literature.

The feudal fragmentation of Russia, Europe and the weak interstate relations between the countries of Asia and Europe, which did not allow, by uniting their forces, to repulse the conquerors.

The numerical superiority of the conquerors. There was a lot of controversy among historians about how much Batu brought to Russia. N.M. Karamzin indicated the number of 300 thousand soldiers. However, serious analysis does not allow even getting close to this figure. Each Mongolian horseman (and they were all horsemen) had at least 2, and most likely 3 horses. Where in forest Russia in winter to feed 1 million horses? Not a single chronicle even raises this topic. Therefore, modern historians call the figure a maximum of 150 thousand Mughals who came to Russia, the more cautious stop at the figure 120-130 thousand. And all of Russia, even if united, could put up 50 thousand, although there are numbers up to 100 thousand. So, in reality, the Russians could put 10-15 thousand soldiers into battle. Here the following circumstance should be taken into account. The striking force of the Russian squads, the princely armies, were in no way inferior to the Moguls, but the bulk of the Russian squads were militiamen, not professional soldiers, but ordinary people who took up arms, not like professional Mongol soldiers. The belligerents' tactics were also different. The Russians were forced to adhere to defensive tactics designed to starve the enemy. Why? The fact is that in a direct military clash in the field, the Mongolian cavalry had clear advantages. Therefore, the Russians tried to sit out behind the walls of their cities. However, the wooden fortresses could not withstand the pressure of the Mongol troops. In addition, the conquerors used the tactics of continuous assault, successfully used siege weapons and equipment that were perfect for their time, borrowed from the peoples of China, Central Asia and the Caucasus that they conquered.

The Mongols did a good job of reconnaissance before the outbreak of hostilities. They had informants even among the Russians. In addition, the Mongol commanders did not personally take part in the battles, but led the battle from their headquarters, which, as a rule, was in a high place. Russian princes, up to Vasily II the Dark (1425-1462), themselves directly participated in the battles. Therefore, very often, in the event of even the heroic death of the prince, his soldiers, deprived of professional leadership, found themselves in a very difficult situation.

It is important to note that Batu's attack on Russia in 1237 came as a complete surprise to the Russians. The Mongol hordes undertook it in the winter, attacking the Ryazan principality. The Ryazan people are accustomed only to the summer and autumn raids of enemies, mainly Polovtsians. Therefore, no one expected a winter strike. What were the steppe people pursuing with their winter attack? The fact is that the rivers, which were a natural barrier to the enemy cavalry in the summer, were covered with ice in winter and lost their protective functions.

In addition, in Russia, stocks of food and feed for livestock were prepared for the winter. Thus, the conquerors already before the attack were provided with fodder for their cavalry.

These, in the opinion of most historians, were the main and tactical reasons for the Mongol victories.

2 ... The establishment of the Horde yoke, its aftermathtii and influence on the fate of Russia

After Batu's invasion of Russia, the so-called Mongol-Tatar yoke was established, a complex of economic and political methods that ensured the domination of the Golden Horde over that part of the territory of Russia that was under its control. A new term "Golden Horde" also appears, which denotes the state formed in 1242-1243. The Mongols, who returned from the western campaigns to the Lower Volga region, with the capital Saray (Saray-berke), whose first khan was the same Batu.

The main among these methods were the collection of various tributes and duties - "popluzhnoe", the trade duty "tamga", fodder for the Mongolian ambassadors - "honor", etc. The most difficult of them was the Horde "exit" - tribute in silver, which began to be levied as early as 40 -th years XIII century, and since 1257 by order of Khan Berke, the Mongols made a census (I census in the history of the country) of the population of North-Eastern Russia ("record in number"), setting fixed rates. Only the clergy were exempted from paying the "exit" (before the adoption of Islam by the Horde at the beginning of the 14th century, the pagan Mongols, like all pagans, were distinguished by their religious tolerance).

Representatives of the Baskaki Khan were sent to Russia to control the collection of tribute. Tribute was collected by tax farmers - "besermen" (Central Asian merchants). By the end of the XIII-beginning of the XIV century, the institution of Basque people was abolished due to the active opposition of the population. From that time on, the Russian princes themselves began to collect the Horde tribute. In case of disobedience, punitive campaigns followed. As the domination of the Golden Horde was consolidated, punitive expeditions were replaced by repressions against individual princes.

Having become dependent on the Horde, the Russian principalities lost their sovereignty. Their receipt of the princely table depended on the will of the khan, who gave them labels (certificates of reign). The measure that consolidated the domination of the Golden Horde over Russia was the issuance of labels for the great reign of Vladimir.

Those who received such a label added the Vladimir principality to their possessions and became the strongest among the Russian princes in order to maintain order, stop strife and ensure the uninterrupted flow of tribute. The Horde khans did not allow any significant strengthening of any of the princes and a long stay on the grand princely throne. In addition, having taken away the label from the next Grand Duke, they gave it to the rival prince, which caused princely strife and a struggle to obtain the Vladimir reign at the khan's court.

A well-thought-out system of measures provided the Golden Horde with solid control over the Russian lands.

Political and cultural the consequences of the Mongol yoke . The consequences of the Mongol yoke for Russian culture and history were very grave. The Mongols inflicted particular damage on the cities, which at that time in Europe were getting rich and freed from the power of the feudal lords.

In Russian cities, as noted earlier, stone construction ceased for a century, the number of the urban population, and especially the number of skilled artisans, decreased. A number of handicraft specialties have disappeared, especially in jewelry: the production of cloisonné enamel, glass beads, grain, niello, filigree. The veche, the stronghold of urban democracy, was destroyed, trade relations with Western Europe were disrupted, and Russian trade turned its face to the east.

The development of agriculture has slowed down. Uncertainty about the future and the increased demand for fur contributed to the increased role of hunting to the detriment of agriculture. There was a conservation of servitude, which was disappearing in Europe. Serf slaves remained the main force in the private farms of the princes and boyars until the beginning of the 16th century. The state of agriculture and forms of ownership was stagnant. In Western Europe, private property is playing an increasing role. It is protected by legislation and guaranteed by power. In Russia, the state power-property is preserved and becomes traditional, which limits the sphere of development of private property. The term "state power-property" means that land is not, as a rule, an object of free sale and purchase, is not in someone's full private ownership, land ownership is inextricably linked with the implementation of state functions (military, administrative, legislative, judicial) , and state power cannot be someone's private business.

The intermediate position of Ancient Russia between the West and the East is gradually replaced by an orientation toward the East. Through the Mongols, Russians are assimilating the values of the political culture of China and the Arab world. If the ruling elite of the West in the X-XIII centuries. As a result of the Crusades, she got acquainted with the culture of the East as victors, then Russia, having a sad experience of defeat, experienced a strong influence of the East in conditions of demoralization and a crisis of traditional values.

In the Golden Horde, Russian princes adopted new, unknown in Russia forms of political communication ("hitting the forehead", that is, with the forehead). The concept of absolute, despotic power, with which the Russians were familiar only theoretically, on the example of Byzantium, entered the political culture of Russia on the example of the power of the Horde Khan. The weakening of the cities created an opportunity for the princes themselves to claim the same power and a similar expression of the feelings of their subjects.

Under the influence of specifically Asian legal norms and methods of punishment, the Russians eroded the traditional, still tribal idea of the punishing power of society ("flow and plunder", "blood feud") and the limited princely right to punish people (preference for "vira", fines). The punishing force was not society, but the state in the form of an executioner. It was at this time that Russia recognized the "Chinese executions" - the whip ("commercial execution"), cutting off parts of the face (nose, ears), torture during the inquiry and investigation. This was a completely new attitude towards man in comparison with the 10th century, the time of Vladimir Svyatoslavovich.

In the conditions of the yoke, the idea of the need to balance rights and obligations has disappeared. The duties of the sweat towards the Mongols were fulfilled regardless of whether this gave any rights. This was fundamentally at odds with the class morality of the West, assimilated by Kievan Rus, where duties were a consequence of certain rights granted to a person. In Russia, the value of power has become higher than the value of law (we still see this!). Power subordinated to itself the concepts of law, property, honor, dignity.

At the same time, there is a restriction of the rights of women, characteristic of the eastern patriarchal society. If the medieval cult of women flourished in the West, the knightly custom of worshiping a certain Beautiful Lady, then in Russia the girls were locked in tall chambers, protected from communication with men, married women had to dress in a certain way (be sure to wear a headscarf), were limited in property rights, in everyday life.

Dependence on the Mongols, wide trade and political ties with the Golden Horde and other eastern courts led to marriages of Russian princes with "Tatar princesses", the desire to imitate the customs of the khan's court. All this gave rise to the borrowing of Eastern customs, which spread from the top of society to the bottom.

Gradually, the Russian lands, not only politically, but to a certain extent and culturally, became part of the Great Steppe. At least the Europeans, who again got acquainted with the life of Russia in the 15th-17th centuries, had many reasons to call this land "Tataria". Due to the difference in the pace and direction of social development in the life of Russia and Western Europe, which had similar forms in the X-XII centuries, qualitative differences arose by the XIV-XV centuries.

The choice of the East as an object of interaction for Russia turned out to be quite stable. It manifested itself not only in the adaptation to the eastern forms of state, society, culture in the 13th-15th centuries, but also in the direction of the expansion of the centralized Russian state in the 16th-17th centuries. Even in the 18th century, when the interaction between Russia and the West and Europe became the main thing, the Europeans noted Russia's tendency to provide eastern "answers" to the "questions" of the West, which resulted in the strengthening of autocracy and serfdom as the basis of the country's Europeanization 3 1.

3 ... Discussion about the degree of influence of the Mongolian (Horde)yoke for development, the fate of Russia

In science, arguments are common. Actually, without them, there would be no science. In historical science, disputes are often endless. Such is the discussion about the degree of influence of the Mongol (Horde) yoke on the development of Russia for more than two centuries. At one time in the nineteenth century it was customary not to even notice this impact.

On the contrary, in historical science, as well as journalism of recent decades, it is believed that the yoke has become a turning point in all spheres of public life, most of all in political life, since the movement towards a single state modeled on Western European countries was stopped, as well as in the public consciousness, which formed, as a result of yoke, the soul of the Russian man, like the soul of a slave.

Supporters of the traditional point of view, and these are historians of pre-revolutionary Russia, historians of the Soviet period and many modern historians, writers and publicists, i.e. in fact, the vast majority have an extremely negative assessment of the impact of the yoke on the most diverse aspects of the life of Russia. There was a massive displacement of the population, and with it the agricultural culture, to the west and northwest, to less convenient territories with a less favorable climate. The political and social role of cities has sharply decreased. The power of the princes over the population increased. There was also a certain reorientation of the policy of the Russian princes to the east. Today it is not fashionable, and often considered inappropriate, to quote the classics of Marxism, but, in my opinion, sometimes it is worth it. According to Karl Marx, "the Mongol yoke not only suppressed, but insulted and dried up the very soul of the people who became its victim."

But there is another, directly opposite point of view on the problem under consideration. She considers the invasion of the Mongols not as a conquest, but as a "great cavalry raid" (only those cities that stood in the way of the troops were destroyed; the Mongols did not leave garrisons; they did not establish permanent power; with the end of the campaign, Batu went to the Volga).

At the end of the 19th and the beginning of the 20th centuries, a new cultural-historiosophical (historiosophy - philosophy of history) and geopolitical theory - Eurasianism - appeared in Russia. Among many other provisions, completely new, extremely unusual, and often shocking was the interpretation by the theorists of Eurasianism (G.V. Vernadsky, P.N.Savitsky, N. Trubetskoy) of Old Russian history and the so-called "Tatar" period of Russian history. To understand the essence of their statements, you need to grasp the essence of the idea of Eurasianism.

The "Eurasian idea" is based on the principle of the unity of the "soil" (territory) and asserts the originality and self-sufficiency of the Slavic-Turkic civilization, which developed first within the Golden Horde, then the Russian Empire, and later the USSR. And today, the current leadership of Russia, experiencing enormous difficulties in governing a country in which there are Orthodox and Muslims nearby, and with their own state formations (Tatarstan, Bashkortostan, Ingushetia, and finally, Chechnya (Ichkeria)), is objectively interested in spreading the idea of Eurasianism.

According to the theorists of Eurasianism, contrary to the tradition of domestic historical science to see in the Mongol yoke only "the oppression of the Russian people by the Baskaks of the rotten", the Eurasians saw in this fact of Russian history a largely positive result.

"Without" Tatar, "there would be no Russia" - wrote P.N. Savitsky in the work "Steppe and Settlement". In the 11th-first half of the 13th centuries, the cultural and political crushing of Kievan Rus could not lead to anything other than a foreign yoke. It is great happiness for Russia that it went to the Tatars. The Tatars did not change the spiritual essence of Russia, but in their excellent quality for them in this era as creators of states, a militar-organizing force, they undoubtedly influenced Russia. "

Another Eurasian S.G. Pushkarev wrote: "The Tatars not only did not reveal systematic aspirations to destroy the Russian faith and nationality, but on the contrary, showing complete religious tolerance, the Mongol khans issued labels to the Russian metropolitans to protect the rights and advantages of the Russian Church."

Developing this idea, S.G. Pushkarev contrasted the "Tatar neutral environment" with the Romano-Germanic "Drang nach Osten", as a result of which "the Baltic and Polabian Slavs disappeared from the face of the earth."

This advantage of the East over the West was appreciated by many Russian statesmen of that time. As a vivid example of the "Old Russian Eurasian" G.V. Vernadsky brought Alexander Nevsky (who, by the way, was canonized by the Russian Orthodox Church). In contrast to Daniil Galitsky, who connected himself with the West, Alexander Nevsky, "with much less historical data, achieved much more lasting political results. Prince Alexander Yaroslavovich singled out in the Mongols a culturally friendly force that could help him preserve and establish Russian identity from the Latin West" - this is how G.V. Vernadsky "oriental" orientation of Alexander Nevsky and his stake on the Horde.

Thought G.V. Vernadsky was deepened by another Eurasian historian, Boris Shiryaev. In one of his articles, he comes to the conclusion that "the Mongol yoke caused the Russian people from the provincialism of the historical existence of small scattered tribal and urban principalities of the so-called appanage period onto the broad road of statehood." “In this intermediate era lies the genesis of Russian statehood,” he stated.

The well-known émigré historian and ethnographer of Kalmyk origin E.D. Khara-Davan believed that it was during these years that the foundations of Russian political culture were laid, that the Mongols gave the conquered Russian lands "the basic elements of the future Moscow statehood: autocracy (khanat), centralism, serfdom." In addition, "the influence of Mongol rule, the Russian principalities and tribes were merged together, forming first the Muscovy, and later the Russian Empire."

The personification of the supreme power, traditional for Russia, also goes away in this era. consequence of the Horde Tatar yoke

Mongol rule made the Moscow sovereign an absolute autocrat, and his subjects serfs. And if Genghis Khan and his successors ruled in the name of the Eternal Blue Sky, then the Russian autocrat ruled his subjects as the Anointed of God. As a result, the Mongol conquest contributed to the transformation of urban and veche Russia into rural and princely Russia / from the author: from the modern point of view, all this looks sad, but ... \

Thus, according to the Eurasianists, "the Mongols gave Russia the ability to organize itself militarily, create a state-compulsory center, achieve stability ... become a powerful" horde. "

In the opinion of the Eurasians, the Russian religious consciousness received a significant "recharge" from the East. So, E.D. Khara-Davan wrote that "the Russian seeking of God"; "sectarianism", a pilgrimage to holy places with a willingness to sacrifice and torment for the sake of spiritual burning could only be from the East, because in the West, religion does not affect the life and does not touch the hearts and souls of its followers, for they are completely and completely absorbed only by their own material culture ".

But not only in strengthening the spirit did the Eurasians see the merit of the Mongols. In their view, Russia also borrowed features of the military valor of the Mongol conquerors from the East: "courage, endurance in overcoming obstacles in war, love of discipline." All this "gave the Russians the opportunity to create the Great Russian Empire after the Mongol school."

The further development of national history was seen by the Eurasians as follows.

The gradual decay, and then the fall of the Golden Horde, leads to the fact that its traditions are taken up by the strengthened Russian lands, and the empire of Genghis Khan is reviving in a new guise of the Muscovy. After the relatively easy conquest of Kazan, Astrakhan and Siberia, the empire is practically restored within its former borders.

At the same time, there is a peaceful penetration of the Russian element into the eastern environment and the eastern into the Russian, thus cementing the integration processes. As B. Shiryaev noted: "The Russian state, without sacrificing its basic principle of Orthodox everyday religiosity, begins to apply the Genghis Khan's method of religious tolerance, which he has tested on himself, to the conquered by the Tatar khanates. This technique united both peoples."

Thus, the period of the XVI-XVII centuries. is considered by the Eurasians as the era of the best expression of the Eurasian statehood.

The Eurasian theory of the relationship between Russians and Mongols (Turks) caused a stormy controversy among Russian émigré historians. Most of them, brought up on the classical works of the Russian historical school, did not accept this interpretation and, above all, the concept of Mongolian influence on Russian history. And there was no unity among the Eurasians either. For example, the prominent Eurasian J.D. Sadovsky in his letter to P.N. Savitsky sharply criticized the book "The Legacy of Genghis Khan in the Russian Empire", published in 1925 for "praising the most vile and vile slavery among the Tatars." Another prominent Eurasian theorist, M, adhered to a similar position. Chess.

"What can we say about opponents of Eurasianism in general." So P.N. Milyukov contrasted the arguments of the Eurasians with his theses about "the absence of a Eurasian culture common to Russians and the Mongols" and "the absence of any significant kinship between the eastern steppe life and the settled Russian." The "apotheosis of the Tatar region" was seen in the Eurasian theory by the prominent liberal historian A.A. Kiesewetter. "Dmitry Donskoy and Sergiy Radonezhsky, from the point of view of an orthodox Eurasianist, should be recognized as traitors to the national vocation of Russia," he sneered.

One way or another, but despite a certain radicalism and subjectivism, Eurasianism is valuable because it provides a new, in fact, interpretation of Russia's relations with both the West and the East. And this, in turn, enriched the theoretical basis of historical science.

The ideas of the Eurasians in the second half of the twentieth century were developed by the famous scientist Lev Nikolayevich Gumilyov and his other followers. This is how L.N. Gumilev wrote on this issue:

"... Moreover, the purpose of this raid was not the conquest of Russia, but the war with the Polovtsians. Since the Polovtsians firmly held the line between the Don and the Volga, the Mongols used a well-known tactical method of long-distance detour: they made a" cavalry raid "through the Ryazan, Vladimir principality. Prince Vladimirsky (1252-1263) Alexander Nevsky concluded a mutually beneficial alliance with Batu: Alexander found an ally to resist German aggression, and Baty - to emerge victorious in the fight against the great Khan Guyuk (Alexander Nevsky provided Batu with an army consisting of Russians and Alans) ...

The union existed as long as it was beneficial and necessary for both sides (L.N. Gumilyov). A. Golovatenko writes about this: “... Russian princes themselves often turned to the Horde for help and did not even see anything shameful in using the Mongol-Tatar troops in the fight against competitors. So ... Alexander Nevsky, with the support of the Horde cavalry, expelled his brother Andrei from the Vladimir-Suzdal principality (1252). Eight years later, Alexander again used the help of the Tatars, rendering them a reciprocal service. Alexander Nevsky to make his son (Dmitry Alexandrovich) the prince of Novgorod.

Cooperation with the Mongols seemed to the princes of North-Eastern Russia to be just as natural a means of achieving or strengthening power as allied relations with the Polovtsy-South Russian princes of the 12th century. " . Eidelman:

"It is impossible, of course, to agree with the paradoxical opinion of L.N. Gumilyov (and other Eurasians!) That the Mongol yoke was the best destiny for Russia, because, firstly, it saved it from the German yoke, and secondly, it could not painfully touch the identity of the people, as it would have happened under more cultured German invaders.I do not believe that such an erudite like Gumilev does not know facts that can easily challenge him; carried away by his theory, he goes to extremes and does not notice, for example, that strength The "knight-dogs" were incomparably weaker than the Mongol ones; Alexander Nevsky stopped them with an army of one principality. Without praising any foreign dominion in general, let me remind you that the Mongol yoke was terrible; that, above all and most of all, it struck the ancient Russian cities, magnificent centers of craft, culture ...

But it was the cities that were the bearers of the commercial principle, commodity, future bourgeoisness - the example of Europe is obvious!

There is no need, we believe, to look for the positive aspects of such a yoke, first of all, because the result of Batu's arrival is simple and terrible; the population, which has decreased several times; ruin, oppression, humiliation; the decline of both princely power and the sprouts of freedom.

Posted on Allbest.ru

The consequences of the invasion and the establishment of the Horde yoke

Batu's pogrom and the foreign yoke that was then established for two centuries led to a long decline in the economic, political and cultural development of the Russian lands, marked the beginning of their development lagging behind the advanced Western European countries.
Huge damage was done to the basis of the country's economy - agriculture. The old land-owning centers of Rus' (the Kiev land, the central regions of North-Eastern Russia), whose inhabitants survived from death and captivity, left their cultivated places and fled to the remote forest thickets of the Upper Volga region, inaccessible to Tatars, and further to the north - in the Trans-Volga region, became desolate and fell into decay. ... The Mongol-Tatars pushed the borders of Russia to the north and west, including in the huge "Wild Field", stretching from the Northern Black Sea coast to the Oka and Ugra, the steppe and forest-steppe lands that the Russian people had mastered since ancient times (the Pereyaslavl principality in the south, the eastern regions of the Chernigov-Seversk land and the southern regions of North-Eastern Russia).
A grave consequence of the Mongol-Tatar conquest was the disunity of Russia into its separate parts, which led to a sharp weakening of the active economic and political ties of the northeastern and northwestern Russian lands with the population of the western and southwestern Russian lands, subsequently seized by Polish and Lithuanian feudal lords.
The massive devastation and destruction of Russian cities, the death and capture of skilled artisan personnel led to a decline in the role of cities in the political and economic life of the country, to the loss of many craft skills and technological methods, to the coarsening and simplification of crafts and handicraft products. Complex types of handicrafts (filigree, niello, cloisonné enamel, polychrome glazed ceramics, stone carving, etc.) disappeared forever or revived only after 150-200 years. Stone construction in cities was suspended, fine and applied arts fell into decay. The link between urban handicrafts and the market was weakened, the development of commodity production slowed down, and the emerging tendency to transform handicrafts into small-scale production was interrupted. Tribute "silver" led to its leakage into the Horde and the almost complete cessation of money circulation within the Russian lands, which led to the termination of the development of commodity-money relations, which began before Batu's invasion.
A heavy blow was dealt to political and trade relations with foreign countries. Only the cities of Western and North-Western Russia (Novgorod, Pskov, Polotsk, Vitebsk, Smolensk) retained trade ties with the west. Northeastern Russia retained trade with the East along the Volga route, but it was hampered by the predatory raids of the Horde on Russian trade caravans.
The difficulties of restoring the national economy undermined by the invasion, restoring the destroyed cities and villages were aggravated by the departure of a significant part of the national income to the Horde in the form of "tribute", "requests", "commemorations" (gifts) to the khans and the Horde nobility, as well as the incessant raids of the Mongol-Tatars on the Russians lands, repeating the disaster of Batu's invasion on different scales. Only in the last quarter of the XIII century. 14 major invasions of Russian lands were committed, not counting many smaller raids undertaken for personal enrichment by the Horde nobility - "princes", "temniks", "ulans", etc. The most devastating invasion, which Russian chroniclers compared with Batyev, was " Dyudennev's army "to North-Eastern Russia in 1293, when the Mongol-Tatars again" made the whole earth empty. "
It took almost a century of hard work and heroic struggle of the people to restore the pre-Mongol level of the national economy in these difficult conditions and ensure its further rise and development as a necessary basis for eliminating feudal fragmentation and creating a Russian centralized state.

Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation

North-Eastern State University

"Discussions about the influence of the Tatar-Mongol yoke on Russian history."

Completed by a student

philological faculty

group I-11

Vechtomova Tatiana

Checked by Associate Professor of the Department of ViIR

G.A. Pustovoit

Magadan 2011

In the XIII century. the peoples of our country had to endure a hard struggle against foreign invaders. Hordes of Mongol-Tatar conquerors fell from the east to Russia, to the peoples of Central Asia and the Caucasus. From the west, the Russian lands and the lands of the peoples of the Eastern Baltic were subjected to aggression by German, Swedish and Danish knights-crusaders, as well as Hungarian and Polish feudal lords.

The period of Mongol-Tatar rule in Russia lasted for about two and a half centuries, from 1238 to 1480. In this era, Ancient Russia finally disintegrated and the formation of the Moscow state began.

Before the invasion of the Tatar-Mongol hordes on the Russian lands, the Russian state consisted of several large principalities that constantly competed with each other, but did not have one large army capable of resisting the armada of nomads.

The problem of the influence of the Tatar-Mongol yoke on the formation of Russian statehood in Russian historiography is expressed by two extreme positions:

1. The Mongol-Tatar yoke brought ruin, death of people, delayed development, but did not significantly affect the life and life of Russians and their statehood. This position was defended by S. Soloviev, V. Klyuchevsky, S. Platonov, M. Pokrovsky. It has also been traditional for Soviet historiography for 75 years. The main idea was that Russia developed during the period of the Mongol-Tatar invasion along the European path, but began to lag behind due to large-scale destruction and human losses, the need to pay tribute.

2. The Mongol-Tatars had a great influence on the social and social organization of the Russians, on the formation and development of the Moscow state. For the first time this idea was expressed by L.N. Gumilev, N.M. Karamzin, and then it was developed by N.I. Kostomarov, N.P. Zagoskin and others. In the 20th century, these ideas were developed by the Eurasians, who considered the Moscow state a part of the Great Mongolian state. There are authors who argued that serfdom was borrowed by Russia from the Mongols

The position of L.N. Gumlev.

A feature of the concept of Lev Nikolaevich Gumilyov is the assertion that Russia and the Golden Horde before the XIII century. not only were they not enemies, but even were in some allied relations. In his opinion, the preconditions for such a union were the overly active expansionist actions of the Livonian Order in the Baltic States. Moreover, the alliance was for the most part military rather than political. This alliance was expressed in the form of protection of Russian cities by Mongolian detachments for a certain fee: “... Alexander was interested in the prospect of receiving military assistance from the Mongols to resist the onslaught of the West and internal opposition. It was for this help that Alexander Yaroslavovich was ready to pay, and pay dearly ”(LN Gumilev From Russia to Russia. - M .: Progress. P. 132). So, according to Gumilev, with the help of the Mongols such cities as Novgorod, Pskov in 1268, and also Smolensk in 1274 escaped capture: “But here in Novgorod, according to the agreement with the Horde, a Tatar detachment of 500 horsemen appeared ... Novgorod and Pskov survived ”(Gumilev LN From Russia to Russia. - M .: Progress. p. 134). In addition, the Russian princes themselves helped the Tatars: “The Russians were the first to provide military assistance to the Tatars, taking part in the campaign against the Alans” (LN Gumilev From Russia to Russia. - M .: Progress. P. 133). Lev Nikolaevich saw only positive sides in such an alliance: “Thus, for the tax that Alexander Nevsky undertook to pay to Sarai, Russia received a reliable strong army, which defended not only Novgorod and Pskov ... Moreover, the Russian principalities, which accepted an alliance with the Horde, completely retained their ideological independence and political independence ... This alone shows that Russia was not a province of the Mongol ulus, but a country allied to the great khan, paying some tax on the upkeep of the army, which she herself needed "(Gumilev L.N. From Russia to Russia - M .: Progress. P. 134). He also believed that this union led to an improvement in the internal situation of the country: “The union with the Tatars turned out to be a blessing for Russia from the point of view of establishing internal order” (Gumilev L.N. From Russia to Russia. - M .: Progress. P. 133).

LN Gumilev cites the following facts to substantiate his idea. First, Tatar-Mongol detachments were not constantly in Russia: “The Mongols did not leave garrisons, they did not think to establish their permanent power” (Gumilev L.N. From Russia to Russia. - M .: Progress. P. 122). Secondly, from many sources it is known that Prince Alexander Nevsky often went to see Khan Bat. Gumilyov connects this fact with the organization of the union: “In 1251, Alexander came to the Batu Horde, made friends, and then fraternized with his son Sartak, as a result of which he became the adopted son of the khan. The union of the Horde and Russia has come true ... ”(Gumilev LN From Russia to Russia. - M .: Progress. P. 127). Thirdly, as mentioned above, Gumilev cites the fact of the protection of Novgorod by the Mongols in 1268. Fourth, in his books Gumilev mentions the opening of an Orthodox bishopric in the Golden Horde, which in his opinion would be hardly possible in the event of enmity between these countries: “In 1261, through the efforts of Alexander Nevsky, as well as the Mongol khans Berke and Mengu-Timur a courtyard of an Orthodox bishop was opened. He was not subjected to any persecution; it was believed that the Bishop of Sarsk was the representative of the interests of Russia and all Russian people at the court of the great khan ”(Gumilyov L.N. From Russia to Russia. - M .: Progress. p. 133). Fifth, after Berke came to power in the Horde, who established Islam as a state religion, religious persecution of the Orthodox Church did not begin in Russia: “... After the victory of the Muslim party in the Horde in the person of Berke, no one demanded that Russians convert to Islam” ( Gumilev L.N. From Russia to Russia. - M .: Progress. P. 134). It seems to me that it is on the basis of these, and maybe even some other, facts that he makes a conclusion about the existence of allied relations between Russia and the Horde.

Other approaches to the problem.

In addition to the concept of L.N. Gumilev, there is one more “original” concept of Nosovskiy G.V. and Fomenko A.T., which does not coincide at all with traditional history. Its essence lies in the fact that, in their opinion, the Horde and Russia are practically the same state. They believed that the Horde was not a foreign entity that captured Russia, but simply an eastern Russian regular army that was an integral part of the ancient Russian state. The “Tatar-Mongol yoke” from the point of view of this concept is simply the period of military rule of the state, when the commander-khan was the supreme ruler, and civil princes sat in the cities, who were obliged to collect tribute in favor of this army, for its maintenance: “Thus the ancient Russian state is represented by a single empire, within which there was an estate of professional military men (Horde) and a civilian unit that did not have their own regular troops, since such troops were already part of the Horde ”(Nosovskiy G.V., Fomenko A.T. New chronology and concept Ancient Russia, England and Rome. M .: Publishing Department of the UC DO MSU, 1996. p.25). In the light of this concept, the frequent Tatar-Mongol raids were nothing more than the forcible collection of tribute from those regions that did not want to pay: “The so-called“ Tatar raids ”, in our opinion, were simply punitive expeditions to those Russian regions that they refused to pay tribute to considerations "(Nosovskiy G.V., Fomenko A.T. New chronology and concept of ancient Russia, England and Rome. M .: Publishing. Department of the UC DO MSU, 1996. p.26). Nosovsky and Fomenko argue their version of events as follows. First, they share the opinion of some historians that Cossacks lived on the borders of Russia back in the 13th century. However, there is no mention of clashes between the Mongols and the Cossacks. From this they conclude that the Cossacks and the Horde are Russian troops: “The Horde, wherever it comes from, ... would inevitably have to come into conflict with the Cossack states. However, this was not noted. The only hypothesis: the Horde did not fight the Cossacks because the Cossacks were an integral part of the Horde. This is the version: the Cossack troops were not just part of the Horde, they were also regular troops of the Russian state. In other words, the Horde was Russian from the very beginning "(Nosovsky G.V., Fomenko A.T. New chronology and concept of ancient Russia, England and Rome. ). Secondly, they point to the absurdity of the use of Russian troops by the Mongols in their campaigns; after all, they could rebel and go over to the side of the Mongol enemies: “Let us stop for a moment and imagine the whole absurdity of the situation: the victorious Mongols for some reason hand over their weapons to the“ Russian slaves ”they conquered, and those calmly serve in the troops of the conquerors, constituting there“ the main mass ”! .. Even in traditional history, Ancient Rome never armed the newly conquered slaves "(Nosovsky G.V., Fomenko A.T. New chronology and concept of ancient Russia, England and Rome. M .: Publishing. Department of the UC DO MSU, 1996 . p. 122). Karamzin wrote in his writings that most of the current churches were built precisely during the yoke. This fact also confirms the basis of the concept of Nosovsky and Fomenko: “Almost all Russian monasteries were founded under the“ Tatar-Mongols ”. And it's clear why. Many of the Cossacks, leaving military service in the Horde, went to monatyrs "(Nosovsky G.V., Fomenko A.T. New chronology and concept of ancient Russia, England and Rome. M .: Publishing. Department of the UC DO MSU, 1996. pp. .127-128). Thus, they write, “The Mongol conquerors turn into some kind of invisible, which for some reason no one sees” (Nosovskiy G.V., Fomenko A.T. New chronology and concept of ancient Russia, England and Rome. M .: Publishing Department of the UC DO MSU, 1996. p.124).

Almost all other well-known historians believe that the relationship of the Golden Horde to Russia cannot be called allied. In their opinion, the reasons for the establishment of the yoke are:

1. Conquest campaigns of the Tatar-Mongols,

2. The superiority of the Mongols in the art of war, the presence of an experienced and large army;

3. Feudal fragmentation and strife between princes.

The Tatar-Mongol invasion is precisely an "invasion", and not a "walk" in Russia, as L. Gumilyov claims and the establishment of the most severe yoke, that is, the domination of the Tatar-Mongols with all the hardships of the dependent existence of Russia.

The consequences of the Tatar-Mongol invasion are as follows: as a result of more than 2.5 centuries of yoke, Russia was thrown back in its development for 500 years, and this is the reason for Russia's lagging behind Western civilizations at the present time. As a result of the Tatar-Mongol invasion, Russian lands and cities were ruined, entire principalities were destroyed, colossal damage was inflicted on the development of the economy and culture, but the struggle against the Tatar-Mongol yoke helped to unite the Russian people, the formation of a centralized state.

Therefore, the Horde still had power over Russia, and the word “yoke” characterizes this power most accurately. The great khans treated Russia as a vassal state, the helplessness of which was supported by great tribute and recruiting. They argue their position with the following facts. First, for the great khans, Russian princes were like a cross between vassals and slaves. So, every time after the change of the khan, they went to bow to him and ask for a label to reign: “Back in 1242, the Grand Duke of Vladimir Yaroslav I went to the headquarters of Batu, where he was approved in office. His son Konstantin was sent to Mongolia to assure the regent of his and his paternal commitment ”(Vernadsky V.G. History of Russia: Mongols and Rus. - M .: Tver: Agraf: Lean, 2000. p. 149). This is also confirmed by the facts of the execution of Russian princes by the Mongol khans, for example, the execution of Mikhail Chernigovsky: “... He was executed together with one of his loyal boyars, who accompanied him to the khan's duck ...” (Vernadsky V.G. History of Russia: Mongols and Russia. - M .: Tver: Agraf: Lean, 2000. p. 151). Secondly, history knows that during the entire period of the reign, the Golden Horde sent many punitive detachments to Russia, who fought against non-payment of tribute, as well as uprisings of princes or common people. The clearest example of this is the "Nevryuev army", sent against the Grand Duke Andrei Yaroslavich, and which, according to the testimony of many historians, did Russia more harm than Batu's campaign: Tatar tumens under the command of the commander Nevryuya. The regiments of Andrey Yaroslavich and his brother Yaroslav were defeated in a fierce battle near Pereyaslavl-Zalessky, and the Grand Duke himself fled to Sweden, from where he returned only a few years later ”(Encyclopedia for Children. Vol.5. History of Russia and its closest neighbors. - M .: Avanta +, 1998.S. 229). Also, one cannot but take into account the frequent censuses of the population of Rus carried out by the khans. Their results were used to collect taxes, as well as to recruit warriors. This version of events is also supported by the fact that there was a decline in culture in Russia: some crafts were lost, many books were burned.

Conclusion.

It is very difficult to draw an unambiguous conclusion on this problem. None of the above versions of the presentation of events can be true.

List of used literature

Gumilyov L.N. From Russia to Russia. –M .: Progress.
Karamzin N.M. History of the Russian state: Book. 2. –Rostov-on-Don, 1994.
G.V. Nosovskiy, A.T. Fomenko New chronology and concept of ancient Russia: Vol. 1. - M: Publishing house. Department of the UC DO MSU, 1996.

Mongols and Russia discussions about the consequences of Mongol rule. Discussions about the impact of the Mongol-Tatar invasion on the Russian state. Positive and negative influence of the Tatar-Mongol yoke

Other materials

Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below

Similar documents

The consequences of the invasion and the establishment of the Horde yoke